As we reported yesterday, the state Supreme Court agreed to hear the lawsuits against Prop. 8. In order, which you can view here thanks to the Sacramento Bee, the court asked that the lawyers to argue these three issues:
*Whether Prop. 8 is an amendment or a revision;
*Whether Prop. 8 violates the separation of powers doctrine under the state constitution; and
*If Prop. 8 is upheld, what, if anything, should happen to gay marriages performed before the ban?
The order says the last of the legal paperwork must be filed by Jan. 21. The Bee reports that the court could hear oral arguments as early as March, which would mean a decision could come before June.
So, in other words, it’s going to be a little wait before we know the outcome. Pack a lunch.
Twice the majority has spoken and twice Prop. 8 has been approved.
Hiding behind the “violating our civil rights” arguement doesn’t hold water. There were candidates and ballot measures I voted on that didn’t make it. IThough I wasn’t happy with the outcome, I accept majority decision and support the process. Now maybe you should as well…
This is total BS for the CSC to even get involved in this action again.
Johnny,………..get your gun!!!.
The religious right and the Mormons are not just trying to take away the rights of gays. Think about what their other objectives are. They would like to bring back prohibition. They don’t want hetrosexual couples living together unless they are married. They would like to reinstate the prohibition against interracial marrage. Take a look at Iran. There’s a country run by religon. That’s what we would have in the US if the christian right gets it way. They want to impose their views and beliefs on everyone.
Here we go again. CSC has no business entering into this. Prop 8 was undertaken in a legal manner and followed all prior legal cases.
There is something that should be noted here that I have not seen talked about concerning Prop. 8. The “yes” people (and all those right-wing Christians) seem to think that marriage is a religious and “moral” issue (their morals, not mine). And to them personally that may be so. But they seem to forget, a marriage can take place anywhere, inside or outside a church, and without any religious overtones at all. We have set that up in the United States. That is why you can get married at the county clerks office, by a Sea Captain, or by some idiot who got some sort of credentials by mail (and yes, that is very possible!). No therefore logic dictates that, at least in this country, marriage has nothing to do with what so many religious-types would have you believe. One more point: Suppose a gay couple lives down the street from you. They are nice people who want the c same good life you do. Then they get married next week. HOW DOES THAT EFFECT YOU PERSONALLY FROM THE WEEK BEFORE? Is you marriage suddenly over? Of course not. Does the couple that went from living together to being married change the way you live your life? Nope! Does it cost you more tax money? Nope! In fact life will go on as it always has. Your little Christian children who see those tow men happily living together, will still see them happily living together. Except now when they ask a question, you can say, Yes, they are committed to each other just like your parents are. It may not be our way, but it is their way. We don’t intrude on their lives, and they don’t intrude on ours. They are neighbors. Live and let live. (Isn’t that a Biblical saying????)
This is because these people who are protesting do not know how to lose gracefully. They cry and whine until we all get bored of it. People have spoken so leave it be and move on with your lives. It’s all getting old and people are not listening to what’s right/wrong..because people voted and that is that.
Jennie. I think you should stick to Real Housewives of OC stories to comment on. You’re not very bright. You can’t make constitutional amendments that are based on religious beliefs in this country. The people who are protesting are asking the state Supreme Court to review this amendment to make sure it does not violate the US Constitution.
I realize you won’t know what I am talking about, but please, try to keep up. I’ll use small words for you. There was a vote in the 60’s to make racial discrimination in the housing market legal, and it passed with 2/3 of the vote. It was challenged, and overturned by the courts due to a violation of the US Constitution. Go read the Constitution.
Mike - Why should the Prop 8 opposition “accept the decision”? Should we accept it the same way the Prop 8 supporters accepted the Supreme Court’s decision overturning the gay marriage ban? Why didn’t the Prop 8 supporters “just accept” that decision. It sounds like you’re just afraid it will get overturned.
Hey Mike, if it doesn’t hold water, why has it been overturned once already? I’m curious to read your response.
NO MORE H8. Prop 8 is notw an internationally known symbol of hatred and intolerance. Way to go California!
there is no argument. if the courts attempt to overturn Prop 8, better overturn Obama while you’re at it.
a minority forcing their beliefs on us, taking rights away from kids,-evey child deserves a mother and father
Mandux - Yeah, that’s not hateful…just like all the other Prop 8 supporters try to tell everyone it’s not about hate.
Civil rights in this country come down to one thing. The government must look at every individual as genderless, colorless, moneyless beings. I am 100% in favor of that viewpoint. Marriage is not about an individual it is about 2 individuals entering into a legal contract. Our government imposes restrictions on these types of contracts all the time.
For that reason this is not a civil right. It is an expansion of a civil contract.
I for one do not feel that it should be expanded. Why not? Because same gender marriage does lessen the value of my marriage in the eyes of society. Look at the Netherlands. Their marriage rate has fallen since allowing same gender marriage. Why? Because those that are straight realize that by allowing same gender marriage to exist it lessens the signifigance of their marriage.
johnadams — your attack on Jennie only demonstrates your lack of understanding on these issues. I’ll try to use “small” words for you — try to keep up. The CaSC is NOT reviewing Prop. 8 under the Federal Constitution. In fact, the No on 8 campaign is specifically asking people NOT to file suit in federal court raising federal constitutional issues. Why? Because Prop. 8 will likely be affirmed under the Federal Constitution. Cases interpreting the Federal Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Constitution do not equate sexual orientation with race or gender. Sexual orientation is viewed under the general right of privacy, and laws that impact privacy rights are given much more latitude under the Federal Constitution (it’s called “rational basis” review, meaning the law just has to have some “rational” non-discriminatory basis) than laws that impact race or gender-based classes of people (which get “strict scrutiny” — a much tougher standard to satisfy, which requires a “compelling” state interest for laws that impact suspect classes).
Interracial marriage bans are a very different animal. Anti-miscegenation laws were part of a larger social and legal system of repression and violence (with roots in slavery). Any comparisons between interracial marriage and same-sex marriage are superficial at best.
technically jennie, people are listening and they’re called the supreme court.
No on 8! I am just guessing that anyone who voted yes didnt really care it would affect their “friends” and their children. It doesnt shelter kids from anything, especially when kids of the people who voted yes are way more open minded
Prop 22 was passed by voters and a judge ruled that it was unconstitutional due to the wording of the constitution. Prop 8 is not so much a law that bans gay marriage, but a proposition to “amend” the California Constitution so that the already passed prop 22 is no longer constitutionally illegal.
Prop 8 titile: Prop 8’s title: ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME–SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. In black and white it says “amendment”.
Why is the court asking this? Can’t they read?
It sure would be funny if its not legal over a word that to most mean the same, but when it comes to the Constitution there’s a big difference and different procedures to follow for each.
Hahaha I hope you phobes get ruled out AGAIN!
The problem is that state constitutional amendments and revisions are very distinct from one another and the proper procedure to
LOL…compare racial to being gay…LOL that is so funny!!!!
Hell of a way to witness, Christians. Non-believers are just lining up to become ignorant bigots like you. Where do I go to get “saved”?
…as if the sanctity of marriage will be ruined if gays are allowed to participate. puhlease, 50% of marriages fail already. i think the sanctity was lost a long time ago.
i want the H8 supporter’s children to grow up, think for themselves and know their parents are bigots. there’s a solid lesson for the classrooms.
No one reads history anymore, such a shame, then you religious wackos would have realized you wasted your time and money.
Let us look back to the United States Supreme Court of the late 1960’s, the so called “Love Court”. Repeatedly many states in the South and a few in the Midwest continued to ban inter-racial marriages, this was expressed by the “Will of the Majority”. Well the majority were a bunch of racist, ignorant, hate filled people, and the court over turned all states ban’s concerning inter-racial marriage.
Who is going to stand up for a minority opinion if the people in the majority are brainwashed?
Aside from that what these states were doing were violating the constitutional right’s of American Citizens by denying them the right to marry who they please, and no one in society can discriminate against race, gender and because of this craziness caused by the Churches, soon sexual orientation will be added to that list.
CSC is the reason why we have Prop 8. If they didn’t fix what is not broken, we wouldn’t be in this mess.
CSC, hands off please.
Discrimination is not up for a popular vote.
Besides changing the CA constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the state legislator (CA Art 18 Sec 1).
A proposition only takes a few thousands signatures to get on the ballot.
CSC will void prop 8.
I love the agreement live and let live-gay marriage wouldn’t affect anyone else
It will be taken to the schools-teachers union already donates for this cause(against the will of many of us teachers)
are you telling me the lawsuits will stop-of course not-the next step it will have to be taught in schools-because it has to be if that is the diffenition of marriage
there is no tolerance on this side-this view is being pushed and will continue to be push-this lessens marriage-(main goal to have posterity) , not having a father and mother will further weaken marriage and hurt children-could you imagine a daughter having to discuss her first period with one of her two dads-there are all these unintended consequences and more that will have a great empact on society
BAM! You homophobic right wingers are going DOWN! You worded your stupid law wrong! It’s not an amendment idiots, it is a revision and that’s something that the Supreme Court takes very seriously when deciding on changes to the Constitution. MORONS, MORMONS; what’s the difference?!
Bwhaaaaaaaaa!!!!!
This is wierd…I am shocked that the left wing of this state (and this country) are complaining about the will of the people and about an issue that has now been twice voted on with the same result in CA. They never whine about such things. The last thing they would ever do is try and impose their unwanted and self righteous beliefs on the rest of the country. They always leave that for the religious right. Again, I am just really caught off guard by this. Sarcasm rules.
wow gina, you are you full of hate…easy girl, calm down. the gays are the true haters!!!
As a Christian, I voted my conscience even though I know that Prop 8 is a constitutional issue that should have never appeared on the ballet. I also realize that Prop 8 will be overturned by the supreme Court as a matter of discrimination.
Those who think of voting to overrule or go against the Constitution in OK have a adolescent understanding of Democracy.
As a Christian I also KNOW that we are in the “end times’ and, therefore, things will only get worse. I’m not saying that we Christians should give up the “fight”, I’m merely saying that they must understand that things such as this are part-and-parcial of the “end times”.
pbb… You never heard a Mormon say that. I’m LDS (Mormon) . Bring back the prohibition? Where did that come from? I don’t drink and I think DUIs are a bad thing but we believe in the law of the land. Have a drink (please don’t drive.) Hetrosexual couples living together (or homosexual couples) are free to do what they wish. Please don’t try to make me tell my kids it’s right. I believe if your mom and dad are married it’s probably a good thing. Broken famlies are hard on kids and if you won’t commit to your wife/husband your odds of having a lasting family are not good. My (white) daughter dated a very nice black man. I had no problem with that. ~where do you get your information do you just make this stuff up? Marriage was a relegious ordinance (between a man and a women) long before it was instituted by the state. If you want a new ordinance create one but don’t tell me I have to parctice it ‘your way’ in my church or teach it your way in schools ~ which dispite the anti 8 ads is exactly what happened in Mass.
John do you realise this is a change (ammendment or revision) to the state consitiution? If you are changing the state constitution you don’t need to worry about not violiating the state constitution. This has nothing to do with the US constitution as it is a State law not a federal law and that should be reviewed by the US Supreme Court not the 9 judges in Sacramento. The last time the judges struck it down was because they believed it violated the state constitution which is why we voted to change the state constitution.
gina-case in point- name calling-shows a lack of tolerance for an opinion different than yours
how sad a period would have to be discussed with a man-that is taking rights from kids
Kids rights are being ignored-it will really hurt them,
Here is a nifty graph that illustrates this ‘debate’ perfectly.
http://graphjam.com/2008/11/19/song-chart-memes-consequences-of-gay-marriage/
Manturd - for the record, I am not gay (yes, straight people can actually be in favor of gay marriage). Yes, and you are being real…you’re showing your true colors of the REAL bigot you are. Hey, I’m just being real too.
badwolf,
That is a clever illustration of this debate but you could also make the arguement that the graph would look the same if it were entitled “Consequences if Gays are not Allowed to Marry”, right?
Manturd - I seriously think that you’ve got the issues that need to be dealt with. I mean, you’re so fixated on the “homosexual life”, it almost seems as if you’re grappling with the fact that you, yourself are struggling with the fact that you’re gay and just can’t accept. Don’t worry, though, I’ll defend your right to marry another man. As for the second part of your latest post…I have nothing. I mean, what is that?
On a side not, I’d like to get this for all the right wingers out there…
http://www.stampandshout.com/shop/bumper-stickers/end-of-an-error.php
socalyard, your absolutely correct! Either way it will effect YOUR life in no way whatsoever.
Hey Gina … the ballot title and question were written was by Jerry Brown (FYI … he’s the attorney general of CA who also opposed the prop), not by Prop 8 supporters. It was worded such to bias the electorate against the measure. So much for elected officials staying neutral. Take the time to learn about the subject before you engage in the debate.
I don’t see how this hurts children as much as divorce does.
Why not outlaw divorce?
Overturning prop 8 is not about gays.
It is about protecting equal rights for all.
The argument is that Prop 8 was not really an amendment, but a constitutional revision, which must be introduced to the electorate by the Constitutional Revision Commision. Because Prop 8 was qualified for the ballot through private citizens and the petition process, it is invalid.
“GET A LIFE BUDDY. You don’t know $hit about me. I’ll worry about my soul you worry about yours”
Wow for someone who says “Society is going down the fu%#$%^& drain” you sure arent helping, maybe the problem is people care to much about themselves, maybe thats why religion is an organized thing. Maybe the answer cant be found with a society of people all out for their own #1, themselves
I actually agree with you, badwolf. That is why I voted no on 8. But my point is that you have all of these left wing haters attacking all of these right wingers for what? So that they can use the word spouse instead of domestic partner. Even the most perfect man alive and the second coming of Christ (Obama) has said that there is nothing wrong with aknowleging the difference between gay marriage and straight marriage. Even he believes that they should be defined differently. Just because people have a different point of view doesn’t mean that they are bigots and haters. I have had enough of these fanatics comparing themselves to Martin Luther King. It is insulting to him and to our intelligence.
I think any house of worship be it Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddist, whatever, the second they donate their money to a political cause, they should loose their tax exempt status. If the Mormon Church wants to be come a lobbyist organization, they should go to DC and setup shop with all the other scumbag lobbyists hijacking our country for special interest groups.
I am not gay but I am a Freedom Loving American, anytime I see discrimination, hatred, bigotry, well it ruins America for me, you religious wackos think what you doing is something noble?
No, you are ruining this county by denying the pursuit of happiness to a select group of people based on your antiquated belief system.
Gay people marrying has nothing to do with you people, you would never associate with gays, be seen with them or be friends with them, you would never invite them to your house, you would never do anything at all with them, sure as hell the gay people will never show up at your houses of worship….so what are you scared of?
I find it hilarious other people are so concerned what happens behind other people’s closed doors.
Are your lives that empty and boring that you have to interfere and disrupt the lives of your fellow citizens????
No worries, Manturd…I get a good laugh out of people like you preaching to everyone about “God’s teachings”. Hard to believe, but not everyone is a Christian and follows your laws. Who makes the rules for us to obey? Why do I have to follow laws based on Christian beliefs if I’m not a Christian? I’m not at all interested in knowing you, nor am I worried about your soul.
Oh, and I have another book you should read…it’s called Hooked on Phonics. “This life that God gaved us Is only borrowed.” Gaved? I rest my case.
How can it be a revision if there is nothing in the constitution that talks about marriage. In order to revise something there has has to be something there in the first place. Of course it is an amendment. The definition of marriage was added (amendment).
These gay people are out of their minds. They cry and whine like babies and the only free speech & behavior that is acceptable to them is what comes out of their mouths. They want every excuse in the world to validate their behavior and mental state of being and the CSC has violated our majority rights and has imposed their beliefs on us and has trampled on democracy once again. I voted for ballot measures in the past that did not pass and I accepted them with grace and respect for the law, the majority and democracy. The sad thing is 3% of the population is gay and you gay people think the whole worlds gay… Get a fricken clue and grow up and crying and get out of the way of democracy.
Schools need to strengthen their civics lessons so that future voters will understand that supreme courts specifically are charged with ruling on constitutional questions — and it is a sacred and historic role of the courts to protect minority rights as enshrined in state and federal constitutions.
The California Supreme Court could rule either way on whether Proposition 8 amounts to a constitutional revision, but the issue demands its attention. The court already has found that same-sex marriage is a fundamental right; now it has the opportunity to fulfill its constitutional obligations to guard against the tyranny of the majority and to ensure that elections do not become vehicles of repression.
Diemel
You never studied American Democracy and your ignorant statement shows it. The purpose of a democracy and checks and balances and the reasons we have a Senate and House is to ensure everyone is treated fairly, THE MINORITY in a DEMOCRACY has to be PROTECTED by the MAJORITY, and if that fails because the majority as in this case is brainwashed by Nazi sympathizers, the courts have to step in and PROTECT the rights of the MINORITY.
According to the California high court, merriage is an equally basic right.
“Seashell, I won’t even comment.”
followed by.. a comment.
The California court has indicated that the quality of the change matters, not just its length or breadth.
Gay-rights supporters, including the largest cities in the state and dozens of legislators, argue that by stripping a protected group of the right to marry, Proposition 8 nullifies the equal protection provisions of the U.S. and California constitutions.
In 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against a constitutional amendment in Colorado that would have forbidden all laws that protect civil rights for homosexuals. The ban violated the equal protection provisions of the 14th Amendment, the court wrote, by singling out one group to be denied the rights enjoyed by all others.
But there also are differences between the Colorado and California measures. In Colorado, gays and lesbians were denied legal protection against discrimination in housing, employment and other basics of life. The court cited the breadth and basic nature of these rights in its ruling, saying there could be no legitimate state interest in the measure, simply animosity toward one group; in contrast, same-sex marriage is both newer and narrower, though, according to the California high court, an equally basic right.
Seashell rules! Good one.
Mandux is the perfect Mantool of the chuch, spewing out garbage and lies, hoping just like the GOP if they repeat lies over and over they will stick, well they don’t.
Yes, there was a gay person in my house, a good friend of mine since freshmen year in high school, he came over with his husband and had dinner with me and my gf.
I know you prob just thew up your lunch reading that, straight people and homos eating together….my god, so scary!
Warren wrote, “…to guard against the tyranny of the majority and to ensure that elections do not become vehicles of repression.”
We shouldn’t have elections then. We should just let the governement tell us how to run our lives. We have no right to say what is right or wrong. We are too stupid. Let’s just let the governement control our economy AND our beliefs.
Don’t you think this should have been debated before it makes it onto the ballot. Why wait until it’s been voted on? Only the left with their circular logic and naive ideological beliefs would wait until the people have spoken to voice their concerns over constututional legality. It just goes to show how self righteous they really are. They are completely SHOCKED that most people disagree with them.
I’m a married hetro with 3 kids. I’ve read all the comments from both sides of this issue. But, I still cannot understand what the “Yes” side issue is. Is it religious? Is it homophobic? What reason would someone have to want to interfere with the lives of other people who are doing nothing to harm them… can someone explain it - without the religious angles?
I just am amazed at all the people mud slinging on here. To Morning Rush - the problem with your arguement is that we are not intruding into the lives of the homosexuals that want to marry, they are intruding on us who have morals that are different than theirs. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, that is a right. It is when the “right wing Christian wackos” have a perspective that is different than theirs, we are the bigots. It seems to me the real bigots are the ones casting stones at the people who are standing up for what they believe in, which is their right. I am saddened by all the people who are using this forum to smear the opposing side. It is really ugly behavior and shows the bad sides to both views. I am allowed to believe what I want and you are too. I dont think it should be pushed on the other. There can still be domestic partnerships even if Prop 8 withstands this legal proceeding. No rights are being taken from you. You have never had them in the first place. You cannot compare sexual orientation to race, they are two separate issues. You were not given the choice of your color, but you can choose who you love. That is the difference. I hope you can all obstain from your rhetoric and get along. I dont think that will ever happen. There is too much hate. We that support Prop 8 dont hate the homosexuals. They are the ones that hate us for not believing in the same things as they do.
Adam…how could you? You’re destroying the children of everyone who doesn’t know you!
Angel - is that what your pastor told you?
Again, this whole controversy is ridiculous. The CA supreme court who of course are only human, by a 4-3 decision suddenly re-defined marriage from what it has always been–between man and woman and found that somehow continuing that definition of marriage was discriminatory even though it did not bar homosexuals from marrying just like anyone else. They have always been able to marry someone of the opposite sex as marriage has always been.
Throughout history other than very recently, I know of no society where there was same sex marriage. None.
And because some on a previous articles comments seemed confused by a similar comment of mine and went off on talking about homosexual relationships between animals as somehow apparently justifying same-sex marriage or something (I’m not really sure what the relevance of those comments was unless they think we are animals) I will clearly state here that I am talking about marriage.
Yes, there have been homosexual relationships in the past, but I know of no society other than very recently where there was same sex marriage.
There has been polygamy practiced and still practiced in some places but that is legally forbidden here, as are marriages between close relatives. And I believe that interracial marriages have historically been allowed although they were forbidden for a time in the US until those laws were overturned. And I am not advocating polygamy or that brothers and sisters, etc be allowed to marry.
My point is that the state does regulate and who can marry whom without it being called discrimination that a brother and sister can’t marry each other or an adult can’t marry a child or that a person can not have more than one spouse at the same time.
So many of us believe that the CA supreme court erred and was confused when it decided to change the definition of marriage and confused the definition of marriage as it has always been with discrimination.
The logic behind that decision and those of the no on 8 protesters to be consistent would require that the state not put any restrictions on who can marry whom. But the state does and it is not called discrimination and neither should the wording in prop 8 be called discrimination and it should not even be necessary and wasn’t for well over 100 years.
And of course when the proposition was being circulated it was to simply affirm what had always been the definition of marriage. And most of us do not see any reason to change that. Jerry Brown’s biased re-titling of the proposition was wrong and inflammatory.
Fredly2000 - No that is not what my pastor told me. It is what I believe to be true. Even so, what would that matter…your pastor told you something else. That is the great thing about our country, you dont have to think like I do. I just dont agree that I should have to accept someone else’s beliefs as my own, or forced to do so.
“Yes, there was a gay person in my house, a good friend of mine since freshmen year in high school, he came over with his husband and had dinner with me and my gf”.
First there was Jesus Christ, then Ghandi and MLK, and now ‘adam’. You are a man among beasts adam, a man among beasts. Bless you.
And Manturd says he has no hate in his heart.
Mandux, I think that you are giving Christians a bad name. You are the reason that many people think that Christians are bigots. I’m sad that you think you are doing a good think with all of the slander.
Seriously, I can’t even respond. I just feel sorry for you. I’m sure my WIFE will get a kick out of you too.
People don’t want to obey God.
They just want to live in sin.
Life vs. death.
That is the whole issue in a nut shell.
Justifying their own sinful desires.
God will NEVER condone it.
†
Relax my little seashell.
You had to be a dyke.
Hahahaha! you crack me up way to look out for #1! You know it is funny to me that you even assume that I am a woman. Which “god” do you follow, cant be the one everyone else is talking about because you must have a whole different set of rules. since when is name calling, cursing and hating (for lack of a better term) accepted by the church?
CAN - I totally agree with you. I dont know how much longer God can take all of this rebellion. He sure is a patient God.
D. Woods,
To distill my previous comment to answer your question, it has to do with the definition of marriage. Marriage has always been defined as between man and woman. There have been polygamous marriages, and interracial marriages, but I know of no society except for very recently where there has been homosexual marriage although of course homosexuality has been practiced in the past.
We don’t see any reason to change the definition of marriage. It is not about hate, contrary to all the name calling that homosexuals seem to always use when anyone does oppose homosexuality. With the exception of a few who may really despise homosexuals and call them names, the majority of us to not hate or fear homosexuals. And we really aren’t interested in someone’s sexual orientation or other aspects of their sex life.
I will also point out the supporters of prop 8 are a diverse group. Many of us do so on religious grounds but others are not religious.
I hope this helps to answer your question.
Well, Adam, his girlfriend, my wife, and I better pack our bags because according to Manturd, we’re going to be taking a trip south to hell. How terrible of us to support civil rights for another person!
Mandux, you are clearly gay, dude, just admit it. Nobody hates gays as much as you do without having some serious deep-rooted issues.
Unfortunately, these are the people who do the most screaming. Not everyone who voted yes on 8 is a “Nazi” or a “Bigot”. Not everyone who voted no is a martyr for human rights. Most of us have logical opinions but many on this board, both right and left, are the fanatics who scream their illogical views from the mountain tops. It is excellant entertainment though…more more more!
Mandux, you have got to be the most intellectually bankrupt moron to ever taint this blog with your idiocy. I have to say it is a HUGE surprise to learn you are a bible thumper to boot. Thank you for once again reinforcing that you and your American Taliban ilk, are incapable of rational debate.
Mandux - well you want to call your bible verses into the mix and try to say they are living in sin, that would lead me to believe you are a christian. But I dont think you really are, you are just an angry person with nothing good to say. I dont know if it makes you feel better to hurt other people with your words, but it makes you look bad. I agree that they are acting silly on TV, but you are acting like a moron as well. Two wrongs dont make a right.
Mantard, you are the last idiot who should be correcting other people’s grammar.
The best part is you attempt to correct me by stating, “Adam is Church not chuch” LOL
You just prove very few people who call themselves Christians are Christians, you know nothing of the work of Jesus Christ, he was one of the greatest socialists who ever lived.
Angel your comments are thoughtful, however just because they are thoughtful does not mean they are wrong. You are entitled to your opinions and such and I am entailed to attack them as racist, hate filled fear mongering being carried out on the false pretenses that a homosexual marriage will somehow impact you personally, which it will not. If you were spewing off Nazis ideal, you would be criticized too, just because you seem to think you are in the majority and many family and friends share your opinion does not make it right. What makes my opinion right? Well I am not taking away or denying rights to anyone or interfering in their lives, most gay people are born with their sexual preference hardwired into their minds, it is not a choice.
“god” was not God, on purpose, if you dont know why, it would be because I am implying you follow a different one.. But I suppose your church wouldnt have taught you the difference?
The Mormon Church did not donate a single penny to the “Yes on 8″ campaign - MEMBERS of the Mormon Church did, and we DO pay taxes. So anyone who wants to have the Mormon Church stripped of its tax exempt status needs to do a little research and get their facts straight.
Adam, I hate to agree with you…I am not filled with hate. On the contrary, I dont hate anyone. Nor am I a racist. just an American with an opion, one that I’m allowed to have by the way. It is the people who dont agree with me that are hateful. I noticed that you said that you would attack my opinion. That is the problem. You are entitled to attack me. The best part is that I dont really care what you say about me, the only one left fuming is you.
ADAM said “you know nothing of the work of Jesus Christ, he was one of the greatest socialists who ever lived. ”
Christ didn’t believe in stealing from the rich to give to the poor. He believed that philanthropy should come from generosity.
Please stop calling everyone Nazis. It offends me to think that you are comparing this Prop 8 to the extermination of hundreds of thousands of innocent people. You and MANTURD are an embarrassment to the people who happen to argue the same side.
It’s so silly that people are still arguing over this and telling us that we should just “accept” the decision. Like the yes on 8 supporters accepted the court overruling the original decision. It is my opinion that a 52% to 48% vote is NOT enough of a majority to make a major decision like this. That percentage means our state is nearly 50-50 on the issue!!
As a heterosexual Christian, I was proud to step up to the polls and vote NO on prop 8, along with a few of my sane, unbigoted Christian brothers and sisters. God gives us the right to live our lives how we choose, to believe in Him or not believe in Him, to sin habitually or not, and we as humans should not take that right away from anyone!!
Raul, to say “every child deserves a mother and a father” is simply ridiculous. Yes, “every child deserves a mother and a father”, that’s why we don’t allow single parenting!
Anyone who wants to sit there and say homosexuality is a sin and that’s why they voted no…take a tip from the Bible and take the plank out of your own eye first. A sin is a sin! Homosexuals are NO worse than you are for lying, cursing, cheating, stealing, or committing any other type of sin! Even murder! ALL sin causes us to fall short of the glory of God. No sin is worse than any other!
Judge not lest ye be judged my friends. Judge not lest ye be judged.
It is disappointing to see my fellow Christians behaving in such a bigoted and hateful manner towards other people. That’s the way to win them to Christ! Yup.
*shakes head*
socalyard, I totally agree with you…to compare people who support Prop 8 with Nazis is ridiculous. Hitler was a psycho who killed a lot of people and is now probably in a much worse place. We are not wanting to exterminate homosexuals. They are allowed to cohabitate with those that dont hold the same beliefs as they do. We just dont want to have to believe it too.
oh, and one last thing - as far as “attacking the sanctity of marriage”…let’s make divorce illegal first. That attacks the sanctity of marriage a thousand times more than two homosexual people sharing their love EVER would!!
“let’s make divorce illegal first” Megan! I like that!
Megan, I’m a sane unbigoted Christian who voted no on Prop 8. You should know your scripture as well as to not take up company with the wicked. I’m not saying that I dont sin, because I do. I dont think it is a good idea to legalize something that allows people to live a lifestyle that is against what God intended for this country. I’m not judging people for what sin they are doing. I’m just calling it what it is.
…Mandork seriously, I asked you that question because your behavior does not imply that on its own, which if you read the Bible, it should,a little something along the lines of… you shouldnt have to force your beliefs on people. Your behavior should reflect your beliefs.
*say
This whole thing is confusing. The argument from the left is that you can not discriminate because it is wrong. I would say that society discriminates often when it is in the best intest of society. We do not allow 3 people to be married because society believe that is not in its best intrest. We do not allow people to marry animals becaus it is not intest of society. We do not allow Parent to marry there children and siblings to marry also because it is not in the best intrest of society. If we go just by the no on 8 argument that 2 adults that love each other should be able to marry, then we should no longer have required blood tests, no longer have rules about siblings marring, and parents marrying children, because hey if they are in love and are of consenting age they should be able to do what they want. This is what is wrong with our society today, is that any group who wants to do something that the bulk of society does not agree with screems discrimination. I say do what you want, I do not really care, but be prepaired for the consequenses. If gays want to be Married let them, but write and ammendment to the state constitution that does gives parents the right to opt out of that class instruction if that is how they believe, and protect all churches by state law from being sued if they do not want to perform a gay marriage. If you do that gays can be married and I do not care. Just remember once we let 2 adults in love get married, we need to allow any 2 adults in love to get married, and we should not be checking if they are related, gay, straight, or diseased.
Reading what these other “christians” have written makes me ashamed to call myself one. Where is the LOVE?? Love your neighbor as yourself…even if they are gay!!
How can you claim to be a Christian and not follow the most important commandment?? Wow.
No wonder Jesus couldn’t stand the churches of his day…I know exactly how he felt!
raul Says:
November 20th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
a minority forcing their beliefs on us, taking rights away from kids,-evey child deserves a mother and father
Nice extraneous punctuation, Raul. Aside from that, every child deserves good parents or a good parent.
This tired argument is so weak considering tons of straight parents are single parents.
Let’s consider what was voted on.
It was taking away rights that the California Supreme Court granted to thousands of deserving citizens who deserve equality and YES, civil rights.
As a recently married gay male in a 11 year relationship, it gave me equality and rights that other tax payers receive and deserve.
Separate Church and State. Please leave bible verses out of this.
Thank you.
LOL…this has been beyond entertaining more so than anything. I am not fuming nor am I angry. I know Prop 8 will be over turned and I know those who do not properly study history are doomed to repeat it!
The religious right and conservatives have no problem making stupid smug statements such as either your in the light of god or not, gee well statements like that divide this county more than me calling you idiots Nazis.
HERE WE GO AGAIN !!!
Adam - you too are a bigot. Have you ever thought of that, boy genius?
Megan, I can love them and not agree with their life. There is a difference between loving someone and condoning their lifestyle. I think He is less impressed with the church of this day. You cant have it both ways…
Megan:
Do you read the Bible? That book is God’s written word.
Read Exodus 18:22
There are many other verses stating why God does not approve of Homosexuality.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
Hi, Megan : )
No one will be doubting what God is about when His son comes back and takes His children to heaven. One day all knees will bow and all tongues confess that He is Lord. Then you will all reap the bounty of sin that you have been living in. The beauty of being a christian is that through the blood of Jesus, we are clean. It wont be pretty.
Megan,
Please note that the CA supreme court decision that made the major decision to overturn prop 22 and re-define marriage was only a 4-3 decision so that was pretty close also.
I agree with you in part, however I think that most of us yes on 8 supporters posting here are being very careful and respectful of others–not hateful like so much of the name calling by the no on 8 side.
Another issue at play here, which was denied in campaign commercials, but it has happened is the fact that homosexuals are forcing their views onto those who believe it is wrong. They have shown themselves to not be content with simply rights, but are forcing those who disagree to participate with them. They have already taken a fertility clinic to court for refusing to artificially inseminate a lesbian member of a couple, rather than take the offered referral.
There was also a case in I believe MA where a church was charged with discrimination for refusing to allow a same sex service on their premises.
Unfortunately the courts are limiting the 1st amendment rights to free exercise of religion in favor of newly invented homosexual or other rights.
So while this is not explicit in either prop 8 or the previous court decision, using past actions by homosexual activists leads to the conclusion that if prop 8 is struck down, that in the future they would challenge churches and Christian or other religious organizations for discrimination if they refuse to allow or participate in same sex marriages.
So it isn’t just a matter of everybody live and let live as some are saying. Homosexual activists have a history of forcing their views onto others–not all homosexuals do, but many activists are. In Canada and Scandanavia pastors were charged in court for simply teaching what the Bible has to say about homosexuality.
Most of us who support prop 8 do not hate or fear homosexuals and many of us have family members who are homosexual that we care for.
And its interesting that just a few years ago, many homosexuals were quoted as not being even interested in being able to marry someone of the same sex.
Megan,
I suppose your Pastor supported No on 8 !
Angel, who did Jesus hang out with? I seem to recall that he hung out with the “wicked” - the murderers, the prostitutes, etc. He didn’t hang out with the church leaders and the “christians”.
You should take a page out of Jesus’ book my friend. The “wicked” are the ones that need to be saved! Our purpose is to win those people to Christ, not push them further away!
I hate to burst your bubble, but I can guarantee you when you get to heaven, you’re going to find *gasp* gay people there!!
Hetrosexuals and homosexuals are DIFFERENT. Why is that so difficult for some people to understand? Hetrosexuals are attracted to the opposite sex and homosexuals are attracted to the same sex. Let’s call it what it is, but it certainly is not discrimination. Everyone is different; no two people are exactly alike. Society would be extremely boring if everyone were exactly the same.
It is not a matter of “separate but equal,” it is a matter a “different but equal.” I agree that “separate but equal” is inherently not equal; our Country’s history has shown that. Just as conservatives are DIFFERENT than liberals and men are DIFFERENT than women, hetrosexuals are DIFFERENT than homosexuals. This is not a matter of equal rights. If someone has liberal views should he or she have the “right” to be called a conservative? If someone is a man should he have the “right” to be called a woman. Of course not. There are numerous ways in which people are DIFFERENT.
What’s next? Are homosexuals going to find someone to sue and claim discrimination becuase they are not able to have a child without a member of the opposite sex being somehow involved. I guess God would be the defendant in that lawsuit.
I agree that homosexuals should have every legal right granted to hetrosexuals, but calling the union between two people different things does not eliminate anyone’s rights; it acknowledges the differences inherent everywhere in society.
I voted yes on prop 8, but I would be the first in line to argue that any and all legal rights granted to hetrosexuals should be granted to homosexuals; let’s just all acknowledge the differences between the two groups and accept that simply using a different term to decribe the union between two people who love each other does not impact anyone’s rights
all the religious texts were written by men who wanted or sought power over others torah, bible and koran are instruments of control over uneducated masses by those few who could read and write
religion is a crutch for the weak minded fool.
Adam, you sound angry when you attack someones opinion. I believe that Prop 8 could be defeated or withdrawn, mainly because Satan is the lord of this world. He is doing a good job of screwing it all up. And people are more than happy to join him in his quest to do so….even so called christians.
Proposition 8 was a revision to the existing California Constitution, and not simply an amendment. As such, the ‘Yes’ campaign collecting signatures (after an initially unsuccessful attempt) to get it on the ballot did not fulfill proper procedure. This argument holds water, and is the primary reason why the CSC is going to hear the case.
Those who are making no further claim than the fact that a slim majority has spoken need to refresh themselves on the purposes of both the state and federal supreme court. As was stated earlier, the majority has voted several times in the past for things that were overturned due to their lack of constitutionality. The majority approved racially discriminatory acts in the 1960’s that was overturned, for one example. So it being a majority vote does not, in and of itself, close the case. And those of you who feel that the sky is falling because of this fact clearly don’t know enough about government to remotely debate the topic at hand.
ocballfan - wow, way to make me laugh. I am not and will never be ashamed of myself for showing other people the LOVE of God. God does not condone homosexuality. Nor does he condone judgement. Nor does he condone murder. I could go on and on.
I am not condoning homosexuality. I am simply saying that we should allow people to live their lives the way THEY choose to. That is what God intended for this world. HE gave us the freedom to live our lives how we choose, wicked or not. Who are you to take that away from anyone? You are making yourself more powerful than God. I would say you should be ashamed, but again, where is the love in that statement? Point proven.
ADAM and MANDU should be locked in a room together. Two of the most hate filled people on this board who have opposite opinions. I would pay to see that. Fanatic Fest 2008!!!
mandouche… wow
ocballfan - don’t try to act like you know me, when you don’t. My pastor is Rick Warren, who my father happens to work for. Go search “Rick Warren” in the search bar, and you’ll find an article about a protest outside of his church because he voiced his opinon for “yes on 8″.
Not everyone follows what their pastor tells them to do. I wish I could say the same for you. Pastors are HUMAN, like you and I. That makes them fallible.
I hate to disagree with you Megan. Not all people get to heaven. I read my bible. We should be trying to reach those that are not saved. It is very clear in the good book, who will not inherit the kingdom of heaven and homosexuals are not one of them. Unless they are washed in the blood of Christ. But if they were, they would not be homosexual. You cant serve two masters or straddle the fence, which you seem to be.
The people have spoken! The supreme court should not over turn the peoples vote.If they do I call immediately for their resignation or removal from the bench. The judges are no good and they should be removed. If the people do not like the way the vote went, then move the hell out of Calif.NOW!!That is life in the fast lane.
You attend Saddleback?!
Megan, He does not condone judgement, but we should call sin what it is, a sin. People do have a choice in the way they live their lives, that I will not dispute. God has given man free will. But that does not make it right to live in a homosexual lifestyle. I dont want to take that right away from anyone, I just dont want to have to accept it as truth. I’m sure that Rick Warren voted yes on Prop 8.
Wow, Angel, you are confused. So, because you are a Christian, you have never committed a sin? Since you accepted Jesus, you have been perfect? I think not. Sin is the REASON we need Jesus!!
You don’t get into heaven based on WORKS. You get into heaven because you believe that Jesus was who he said he was, and did what he said he did. That cannot be taken away from you because you sin after accepting Jesus.
If that were so, NO ONE would make it into heaven!!
Heaven is going to be a lot more crowded than you think it is my dear.
And Angel, don’t you dare attack me and say that I am serving two masters or straddling the fence. I know what I believe in and I know who I serve, and it is the one true God.
Yes, not everyone will make it into heaven, but a lot more people will be there than you think.
BERNIE,
I voted no on Prop 8, but that is the closest thing to common sense that I have read on this message board. Thank you.
By the way, I also voted yes on 4 and for McCain. So apparently, If you want your vote to pass, make sure I don’t agree with you.
I never said that I didnt sin, Megan. I am a sinner and that is why I need the forgiveness of Christ. I never said that you get into heaven based on works, on the contrary it is only through the belief in Christ that you can make it through the narrow gate into heaven. My point is that if you have accepted Jesus, you cannot live in a lifestyle that is contrary to His teaching, which would be a homosexual one. They are not christians then. Heaven might be more crowded my dear, but it will not be filled with those who proclaim to know Jesus and live in a lifestyle that is not Christlike. It will probably be lacking some of the people who you think should be there.
JakeD - I attended Saddleback…I no longer go there. I would state the reasons why I no longer go, but I would rather not get into a fight over it. There were simply things going on there that I could not agree with. I will leave it at that.
“That is life in the fast lane”… stop impeeding the speed limit and get out of the fast lane!
You cant serve the one true God and believe that a homosexual lifestyle is acceptable for a believer. That is all I’m saying.
I’m not attacking you Megan. Dont get me wrong. I’m just saying that you cant have it both ways.
ANGEL, did god actually address prop 8 in the bible? I want to see. I am actually more curious to see what kind of handwriting he has.
Get over it! The majority has spoken and you LOST the vote! It’s not about disliking Gays because that is not the case. I think Elton John Says it best (He is of course gay…but is pretty smart if I must say so…)
At the Elton John AIDS Foundation in NYC on Monday night, he said, “We’re not married. Let’s get that right. We have a civil partnership. I don’t want to be married. I’m very happy with a civil partnership. If gay people want to get married, or get together, they should have a civil partnership. The word marriage, I think, puts a lot of people off. You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships.”
Way to go Elton! Now why don’t the rest of all you guys follow in his footsteps!
“Megan Says:
November 20th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
oh, and one last thing - as far as “attacking the sanctity of marriage”…let’s make divorce illegal first. That attacks the sanctity of marriage a thousand times more than two homosexual people sharing their love EVER would!!”
OK Megan I don’t go around quoting bible verses in here as many your ahem, side, wish people not to (I wonder what the obsession with controlling opposing speech is? wow). technically I’m catholic, therefore I don’t believe in divorce either. quite consistent, wouldn’t you say? so put that in your pipe ‘n’ smoke it
“There were simply things going on there that I could not agree with. I will leave it at that.”
it’s just too bad for our country Obama didn’t take the same advice. then again, he put up with it for 20 years. what a nitwit
It is amazing how polorizing so many of the comments here are. Why can’t we put in some laws the guarentee parents rights to control what their children are taught about marriage and sex in public school? Some laws that guarantee that any church can teach as it feels it should, and that any consenting adult who loves another consenting adult can get married, and then just live and let live. Agree to disagree, get over ourselves.
Angel, we shall simply agree to disagree. You don’t believe heaven will have homosexuals, and I do. You will never convince me otherwise. We all live in a lifestyle that is contrary to his teaching. We all sin, and we all fall short of the glory of God. That is why we need Jesus. That is why we pray for forgiveness when we commit a wrong act.
When we get to heaven, we will both know the answer.
I happen to believe, mine will be right.
It is absolutely amazing to me that the WILL of the majority is being reviewed. I look at this from a pragmatic point of view in that there are things that do not make sense.
1- A simple evolutionary principle is that the strongest survive. All apex predators have two absolute requirements; food and the ability to reproduce. Regardless of how one FEELS about the issue, the inability to procreate will obviously and eventually will cause a homo-sexual creature (no matter what the species) to become extinct.
2- Whom we choose to have sex with (and it is a choice) cannot be viewed as a right. NO ONE has the right to have sex, that simply does not make sense. I do not have the RIGHT to have a sexual relationship with anyone. I and my potential sexual partner must choose to have sex with one another. Therefore, biologically (and evolutionary) dictates the “pool” of potential sexual partners to choose from. Afterall, the obvious reason to have sex is to reproduce not for self-gratification - or is it?
3- Since it is a choice how can it possibly be legislated? Choices are based on morals- morals cannot and must not be legislated.
4- How can those that voted no accuse those that voted yes of being intolerant when they are being even LESS tolerant?
5- How long will it be before we redefine marriage once more to include the “right” of an adult to have sex with a child! It is a slippery slope. AND DON’T THINK FOR A MINUTE THAT IT WON’T HAPPEN
OC4truth, you’re regurgitating the same canned responses from the ‘Yes’ campaigns website and their flyers. At least try to come up with new logical fallacies before sharing your opinion, that you’ve duplicated from somebody else almost verbatim.
When you said yourself that Prop 8 is not directly tied to any of your previous allegations, you’ve admitted right then and there that they are red herrings that have no place in your argument. Yet, you still turn right around and use them as though it is proving something. This is exactly why Prop 8 is being protested, because it is this kind of misinformation and ignorance that lead it to success.
That you’re using Prop 8 to stop future adverse affects of the so-called ‘Gay Agenda’ is not only based entirely upon conjecture and speculation, but is a slippery slope fallacy. It’s no different than if I sat here and tried to convince everybody that religious institutions wanted to bring us back to the dark ages by slowly reversing liberalism via revokation of various liberties. It’s a prediction, and it’s anargument based on irrelevant, future events that have absolutely nothing to do with two people getting married.
Such as? I won’t fight with you.
CONFUSED,
Bravo…my sentiments exactly….anyone who doesn’t agree with us is a Nazi, bigot!! Just kidding of course!
socal yard, funny. The bible is specific about what behaviors are unacceptable.
If you want to live in a theocracy, fine, move to one.
The United States, however is a pluralistic society where one religious doctrine doesn’t dictate over another one. And those that want to bring up that the US was founded by Christians, fine, but look at the denominations of those founders. The majority of which were of religions which spoke out against Prop 8. They understand we don’t put religious docrtrine in our Constitutions.
The majority of religions pushing prop 8 (with the notable exception of the catholics) weren’t even in existance when the country formed. It was because of the work in our Constitution by the Unitarians, Quakers, Episcopalians, etc, that these religions were even allowed to form.
JakeD - I’m not worried about you, I’m worried about the other people in the thread. My email is “peezysgirl@gmail.com” - email me if you really want to know.
(and if anyone wants to send hate mail there, it will be unread and deleted, so spam away)
Megan, we will just have to wait and see. If it keeps going the way it is, that wont be too long from now anyways.
Wow Megan,
Don’t be so judemental!!!
My Pastor is Rick Warren as well.
I’ve been a member of Saddleback for 20 years!!!
I am not condemning gays. I am against their lifestyle ands how it affects our children.
Do you pick and choose verses from the Bible to suit your lifestyle? I certainly don’t. I would be interested to know your fathers take on all this, being that he works for Rick!
Angel,
I understand what you think. My point is that what someone wrote in the Bible isn’t necessarily what God wants. Taking the Bible or the Koran or any other written scripture too literally is dangerous. Thou shall not work on the sabbath? Come on! That sounds great to me and all but doesn’t that sound like the writings of a guy that just wanted a day off?
Race & Sexuality have nothing to do with each other in this matter!! You can’t CHOOSE the color of your skin, but you can CHOOSE the gender you are attracted to! Just like some men prefer blondes or brunettes, tall or short, skinny or fat. Gays CHOOSE to be attracted to people of their own sex. So this is NOT a civil rights issue!! Prop 8 passed…move on!
ocballfan - judgemental? pray tell, where?
Do YOU pick and choose verses from the Bible to suit your lifestyle? I most certainly do not.
My parents voted yes on 8, and we had many discussions on the topic. They did not agree with my decision, I did not agree with theirs.
Guess what? It’s OKAY to have different opinions!
Well, if you believed in the God that I believe in, you would believe that the bible is the inspired writing of God. The people who wrote it werent just some guys that were looking to write a good novel. The words in it are inspired by God. The difference between the bible I read and the Koran and others, is that their gods are dead and buried, but mine is rose again and lives to this day through His church. So, I do take the bible literally.
Angel, you shouldn’t take the Bible literally. Why? Because a lot of what is written in it is written figuratively!! That means it is open to interpretation.
That’s not to say that some of it isn’t intended to be taken literally…but not all of it is.
Just throwing that out there before I get yelled at. lol
ANGEL,
I respect your belief but to a lot of people, that kind of literal belief is dangerous. Because so many people have had their hands on the Bible as you know it today and they have “translated” it or added and subtracted. My point is that you need to think for yourself sometimes and not just open a book to find your opinion. I know I can’t be sure that what I am saying is right but it sure feels like it.
one more thing ocballfan - Exodus 18? the old testament? the covenant we are no longer bound by thanks to Jesus coming?
I don’t see anyone stoning whores in the streets….
Food for thought, since you claim I’M picking and choosing verses to suit my lifestyle.
I have been reading these comments and I thought I would comment. I am a Yes on 8 supporter, however, I do not base my belief on religion. In fact, I don’t go to church nor can I cite the Bible versus by versus, cover to cover. I just want to make that much clear.
The argument that gets made by No on 8 supporters is that the domestic partnerships don’t provide the same entitlements as do marriages. My question is then why do you work to change the laws and/or entitlements under domestic partnerships and leave marriage out of it? I think that would be something everyone can work towards and is a solution that everyone can agree with. Leave marriage for men and women and domestic partnerships have the same rights without the title.
I think the way that the No on 8 camp goes about things just lessens their credibility and people tune them out. After all, they accuse Yes on 8 people as forcing their beliefs upon them. Aren’t they doing the same thing?
Megan:
In a comment to JakeD you wrote:
“I attended Saddleback. I no longer go there. I would state the reasons why I no longer go, but I would rather not get into a fight over it. There were simply things going on there that I could not agree with”.
_____________________
When you commented to me that your Pastor was Rick Warren earlier I thought that was interesting. Now I find out that you left the church because of something that happened.
Obviously, you did not tell me the truth!!!!
HAPPENS ALL THE TIME,
Are you telling me that I chose to be attracted to large busted women. Why would I chose that? It costs a lot of money to have that kind of work done sometimes! J/K
That means that you could be attracted to men but you chose to sleep with women instead? I have to completely disagree with you on that one, pal!
oops..that was to read “cite the Bible verse by verse”…
Socalyard, you are correct. That kind of literal belief is dangerous for all of the reasons you state. I have made it a point in my life to compare the Bible to other “books” written during the same time. Finding corroborative non-Christian texts to help prove that what is written is the truth. I am also searching for some of the books that didn’t “make the cut” to be in the final version of the Bible. Simply to further my knowledge and understanding of what I believe.
I think it is every Christian’s duty to do the same. If you claim to believe it, you should know it inside and out. From a Christian and non-Christian perspective. How else can you truly debate and answer the questions thrown at you by non-believers?
I would recommend Lee Strobel’s The Case for Christ as a starting point. Written by an athiest who set out to disprove Christianity, who ended up becoming a Christian along the way. A very powerful book.
ocballfan - I apologize if you feel I misled you by saying that my Pastor is Rick Warren. I do not attend Saddleback on a regular basis ANYMORE. I do however, still attend with my family on occasion. I don’t disagree with what Pastor Rick teaches (for the most part), which is why I said he is my Pastor. He has made a huge impact on my family and on my life. (hello, my father works for him!) However, yes, I did “leave” the church because of things I saw happening, things that were said, and unjustices that went unnoticed and unchanged, even when they were brought to the attention of the church leaders.
Great book, MEGAN. I would recommend that also.
If marrage between same sex couples had another name the “Yes” group would support it?
Somehow, I think they are fooling themselves.
A rose by any other name is still a rose.
Folks, this isn’t a religious issue for any same sex couple. It’s only a religious issue to those who oppose it. People are not arguing over the same substance issue. One group is fighting over rights while the other is fighting over religious definitions.
A gay or lesbian couple being married has no legal effect on my marriage or the legal status of my marriage or the religious status of my marriage. Why then should it be an issue I would oppose? Why should I want to stick my nose in other peoples business?
Answer: It’s that ol’ time religion!
This really has nothing to do with homosexuality. It also has nothing to do with tradition, as it is a fact that mere history does not make something moral or right.
It has everything to do with gender discrimination. When you go to get a marriage license, can you be denied based on the fact that one of the individuals is black?
What if one is Mormon?
What if one is 80 years old?
What if one is of Jewish ancestry?
If it is not ok to discriminate based on someone’s skin color, age, ethnicity, or religious background, why is it acceptable to discriminate based on someone’s gender?
justmytwocents,
I honestly can’t see any way they are forcing anything on you. How do two people of the same gender getting married to one another adversely affect you, your marriage, your life, etc?
It affects me in the fact that I do not believe agree with choice of lifestyle. Therefore, I do not believe that we need to change the definition of marriage so that it suits them.
I simply put my idea out there as I think there is a better way to go about this than the hateful, mudslinging that has been occurring from both ends.
This is an issue that seems to be neverending so if we can find something that is kind of a “happy medium” if you will, then maybe we can make progress and be able to put this issue to rest.
I know thats a bit of a fantasyland idea!
“It affects me in the fact that I do not believe agree with choice of lifestyle. Therefore, I do not believe that we need to change the definition of marriage so that it suits them.”
You sir, win the non-sequitur of the year award.
Disagreeing with someone’s lifestyle somehow validates stripping them of their court-affirmed right to civil marriage? By that reasoning, the fact that I disagree with the lifestyle of Christians and believe their religion is dangerous to children means that I should work towards stripping them of their right to civil marriage as well?
Care to know what the late President George Washington would have thought of Proposition 8?
“The Citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy: a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship. It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people, that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens, in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.”
This is part of a letter Washington wrote to Moses Seixas, the head of the largest Jewish congregation in America in 1790. Seixas had previously written Washington to thank him and Americans in general for providing shelter to what was historically a profoundly mistreated minority group.
To bigotry, no sanction!
Seems that intolerance is going both ways. Hitting the streets with protest is a right, but some people should “get it!” and “get over it!”. Naysayers to Prop 8 LOST! Try again in the next election, in the meantime try to win over some support, rather getting in the faces of the public. Give it a rest! Next thing I expect to hear is that “Bush” influenced the vote!
It is as simple as this. Take the Bible out of it and Prop 8 is a non-issue. So do we want a country run by the Bible? If so, then we will have to stone women to death who are not virgins at marriage.
Actually, you can leave the Bible in, because there is not a single example in it of what Pro-8 folks describe as “traditional” marriage. Two grown adults, a man and a woman, meeting, falling in love, and then having children is not in any way shape or form biblical marriage.
Biblical marriage is a woman being sold before she hits puberty by her parents to another family for the purpose of being owned by that other family’s son.
Biblical marriage can only be invalidated by adultery, and only if the woman cheats. (Matthew 5:31-32, Jesus’ own words) If the man cheats, well, Jesus didn’t say anything about that. Sorry ladies, you’re out of luck. You were considered mere property at the time, and even Jesus wasn’t enlightened enough to see otherwise. Hey, God’s not perfe…
(I have to point out a glaring contradiction in the Bible here- contrast Jesus’ statement on divorce in Matthew and then skip over to 1st Corinthians 7:15 where another valid reason for divorce is given, and it isn’t adultery)
Marriage in the Bible also included having many wives. Solomon, who was no doubt blessed by God in the Bible arguably more than almost anyone else, had so many wives there isn’t even a count.
Marriage in the Bible meant a woman was married and having kids by the early teen years. Sometimes earlier.
Marriage in the Bible meant never marrying outside your race or religion.
THIS is traditional, biblical marriage. If you’re going to appeal to it to support Prop 8 then I hope you can defend the above.
hISTORICALLY WHEN AN ISSUE PROVES TO BE THIS DIVISIVE THE COURT HAS EVENTUALLY STEPPED IN AND GRANTED THE MINORITY IN QUESTION THEIR RIGHTS.tHAT WILL BE THE CASE THIS TIMEAS WELL.sorry about caps —just looked up
Actually, that’s not true. Read Korematsu v. United States.
Or, Dred Scot v. Sanford.
There’s plenty of LEGAL discrimination in the law. As I’ve pointed out, an adult brother cannot marry his adult sister either.
No on 8 folks may have shot themselves in the foot. If the lib CSC votes in their favor, this will go to the USSC and it is probable that Yes on 8 will win and that it will make such marriages illegal in EVERY state!
to jason; thats ma’am, not sir.
I’m simply stating my opinion. I don’t think that marriage needs to be redefined so that gay couples can get the rights they are entitled to.
I agree that they should have access to the same things as married couples do, however, I must pose the question again: Why not fight to extend the rights under the umbrella of domestic partnerships or civil unions? After all, it is simply about rights and entitlements.
The issue that everyone seems to have a problem with is the use of the word marriage. Wouldn’t that be a way to let both sides have their way?